Case 3327239/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Mehta v Admirable Crichton — 2022
- Case reference
- 3327239/2019
- Decision date
- 28 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Mehta
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued a strike-out warning by letter dated 25 June 2022, giving the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 16 December 2022 and because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant's email of 25 June 2022 was considered on 1 August 2022, but it did not request a hearing and was treated as not being a valid response to the warning.
A further letter dated 7 August 2022 was then sent to the claimant, stating that the response was not considered valid and allowing until 15 August 2022 to make representations or request a hearing. No further communication was received from the claimant. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37.
No remedy was awarded because the claim was struck out before any substantive determination. The judgment is a procedural strike-out decision only and does not contain findings on the merits of the underlying employment claims.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37 after warning the claimant that it might be struck out for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 16 December 2022 and because it had not been actively pursued. The extracted text also records a further letter dated 7 August 2022 giving time until 15 August 2022; this date sequence is recorded as stated in the source. | Struck out | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.